"Immigration Questions for the Presidential Candidates"

When
I travel around the United States to participate in debates and panel
discussions, or appear on various radio and television programs, I find
that many people agree with me on the need for immigration effective law
enforcement.  Many become truly frustrated and then ask me what they
can do to make the politicians accountable.  They tell me how it seems
that no matter what happens our leaders never seem to do what is
necessary to secure our borders and enforce our immigration laws. 
During the conversations I have had, these folks also lament about the
many other areas in which politicians manage to say one thing and do
something else.

The problem is that when politicians appear in public, they all have
the same goal, to appeal to the broadest audience possible to garner the
most campaign contributions and, ultimately, the most votes that they
can because the purpose for their public appearances is to drum up
support from their constituents and those who would back their political
campaigns.

We have all seen politicians in action and we almost always are
amazed by how so many of them are “artful dodgers” when they make
statements and especially when they respond to questions.  It has been
said that attempting to pin down a political candidate is as difficult
as attempting to nail Jell-O to the wall!

These politicians are fearful that if they take a firm stand on one
side of a controversial issue that they will alienate those who oppose
that position and lose their campaign contributions and their votes.  As
a consequence they have learned how to speak volumes and say nothing!

It has been said that you can often judge a person’s intelligence
more by the questions he (she) asks than the answers he provides.

Questions are absolutely essential in so many areas of endeavor.  In
fact, some time ago I remember reading about the value of our nation’s
space program- in particular the value of the various space probes that
NASA and the JPL as well as other organizations have sent hurtling
throughout the solar system.  The most coveted return on the investment
of money, talent and efforts of the scientists, engineers and
technicians to construct, launch and operate those probes was the
questions that those exploratory probes provided the scientists who
received the information transmitted back to the earth.

Knowledge empowers folks, in all areas of endeavor, to ask the right
questions.  Think about how a high-powered (and high priced) trial
attorney earns his (her) paycheck by knowing how to ask those insightful
questions of a witness in court to advance his client’s cause.

This past week I was provided with a truly unique opportunity and
honor- I was invited to address the Tea Party Convention in Myrtle Beach
South Carolina.  As I prepared for this event I spent quite some time
considering how I could empower the audience that I would address. 
Clearly those in the audience were highly motivated!  I would not have
to spend much time convincing them to “get involved!”

Many politicians, and others, have attempted to minimize the
importance of the Tea Party- I think that there is some real trepidation
on the part of politicians from both parties who are concerned that the
frustrations that gave rise to the creation to the various Tea Party
groups will make it impossible to conduct business as usual.  I am not a
“Tea Partier” and I don’t always agree with positions that some members
take- but I have often made the point that “Democracy is not a not a
spectator sport!”

These folks are certainly not spectators- and I appreciate and laud their activism!

Therefore during my address I decided to provide a brief overview
about the many ways that immigration impacts our nation and then I
compiled four defining questions that I thought could help to force a
candidate to define himself.  The questions do not provide much “wiggle
room” and are not the sort of vague questions that are often asked.

We have all heard questions about immigration that provide that sort
of opportunity for artful dodging.  Some of those questions ask, “Would
you secure the border?”  “Do you favor sending the military to the
border?”  “Will you provide illegal aliens with amnesty?”

The experienced candidates can plow these sorts of questions with
confident alacrity.  You can imagine how easily they can say that they
would certainly send the National Guard to the border, build a fence and
not provide amnesty to millions of illegal aliens.  They could actually
follow through on every one of these “promises” and nothing would
change!

National Guardsman can be assigned to the border and told to answer
telephones, maintain Border Patrol vehicles and do other non-enforcement
work and no matter how many such Guardsman head to the border, nothing
will change!

Building a fence won’t make that much of a difference if there are
gaps in the fences that are built and if there are a lack of Border
Patrol agents to stop those who manage to scale the fence or go around
the fences.  Even putting more agents “out there” won’t matter if these
agents are intimidated by the administration by having agents prosecuted
at every opportunity.  (This should not be construed to mean that
agents who engage in nonfeasance, misfeasance or malfeasance should not
be punished- it means that agents acting in good faith need to be
supported by the agency that places them in “harm’s way!”)

Today the administration and the open borders anarchists insist that
because arrests are down along the border that fewer illegal aliens are
running our borders and therefore this means that there are fewer
illegal aliens present in the United States.  I have countered this
argument on a number of occasions, including during one of one of my recent appearances
on Neil Cavuto’s excellent program on Fox Business, that “Trying to
determine the number of illegal aliens who are present in the United
States by reviewing arrest statistics is comparable to taking attendance
by asking those who are not present to raise their hands!”

As for the “Amnesty question,” all that a politician has to do is
explain why by fining illegal aliens or demanding that they learn
English that giving them lawful status is not really an “amnesty!” 
(Beauty is truly in the eye of the beholder!)

I think you see the problems to be found with many of the questions
that the politicians are asked- therefore I have formulated my list of
questions that I would urge you to forward to as many of your friends as
possible and suggest that if they have an opportunity to attend a town
hall meeting where a candidate appears that effective questions will
either provide that candidate with an opportunity to provide clear
evidence that he is willing to do what is necessary or make it clear
that he cannot be counted on to take the vital steps.

Here are the questions that need to be answered by the candidates:

1. If elected President, what would you do with the outrageous
   lawsuits filed by the Justice Department to block states from enforcing
   their own immigration laws that parallel the federal immigration
   statutes?
2. What would you do to make certain that Americans are given
   priority for jobs rather than foreign workers?  Would you seek to expand
   the H-1B visa program that enables high-tech workers to enter the
   United States to take highly desirable jobs, often displacing American
   workers, or crack down on the fraud that permeates that program and
   implement a training program to help Americans take those jobs if there
   is a shortage of highly skilled workers?
3. Would you be willing to hire more ICE enforcement personnel to
   help liberate jobs and combat the growing threat of transnational gangs
   and members of drug cartels?  (There are currently about 7,000 special
   agents at ICE and more than half of engaged in enforcing Customs laws
   while the TSA reportedly has more than 60,000 employees.)  If you are
   willing to increase the number of ICE agents assigned to specifically
   enforce the immigration laws, how many such agents would you hire and
   assign to the enforcement those immigration laws?
4. Would you be willing to cut funding for law enforcement for
   so-called “sanctuary cities” that obstruct and thwart the enforcement of
   our nation’s vital immigration laws?  Would you consider having the
   Justice Department prosecute local officials who, for example, would not
   honor detainers lodged by ICE agents against aliens being held in
   prisons?

The political campaigns are the equivalent of a job interview for
those who seek elected office.  Today it is the office of the Presidency
is on the line and We the People must resolve to do the best job of
interviewing the man who will likely be our next President!